|
Dierk,
Horse archers (1QM 6.15-16) were certainly a feature of Parthian warfare. Yet it is hard to make a case for Parthian tactics in the War Scroll, for a couple reasons. For one, we don't see any reference to Parthian maneuvers in the War Scroll, e.g. the tactic of charging the enemy on horse, then wheeling and shooting arrows backwards at the pursuers (the famous "Parthian shot"). Second, it is difficult to see how Parthian tactics would have arrived in Judea. 1QM 2-9 is identifiable as belonging to the Graeco-Roman literary genre of the Tactica, but I have not read of any ancient reference to Parthian Tactica, and I do not see how the Judeans would have obtained one. Given that the reference to mounted archers is not further corroborated in 1QM - a possible reference to armored horses or cataphracts, also at 1QM 6.15-16, is rendered uncertain by a lacuna - I'm inclined to discount the significance of this isolated datum. Conceivably this reflects a local South Syrian military tactic - how much do we know of tactics in Transjordan, for instance? - or perhaps this detail was introduced as some sort of misunderstanding from a Roman Tactica. I also can't totally discount the possibility that 1QM 6.15-16 is a late "update" to the original Maccabean war manual of 163 BCE, since the MSS we possess only date to c. 100 BCE or later (based on paleography).
The major argument for Roman (rather than Parthian) tactics in the War Scroll is the systematic correspondence between 1QM 2-9 and the Roman legions of the Republican era, including assignment of military duties by age category (with corresponding length of service in 1QM and the legions), the arrangement of legions of identical troops strength in 4 lines, identical ration of cavalry to infantry of 3:14, and other striking details discussed in my "The War Scroll and Roman Weaponry Reconsidered", DSD 3 (1996) 89-129. And the early date is fully corroborated by allusions to Maccabean battles of 164-163 BCE (in proper sequence) and the restoration of the temple in Dec. 164 BCE (a land sabbath year) in 1QM 1-2 as discussed in "Historical Allusions in the War Scroll", DSD 5 (1998) 172-214. These multiple lines of evidence reinforcing the same conclusion carry more weight than an isolated detail pointing to Parthian tactics IMO.
Best regards,
Russell Gmirkin
|
